toetsenbord is a much better word than keyboard 

http://www.foddy.net/Athletics.html 

Thanks for effectivly killing me and Lunaran's productivity. 

i managed to hobble to the 10m mark... also got a few strides in a row that sort of looked like running...

this game reminds me of a science museum i went to as a kid... they had a bicycle set up with mechanical legs attached to the pedals, and four pneumatic pistons each connected to a button. You could make the legs pedal the bike with the right sequence of button presses.

This is a lot harder because in addition to timing, you have to keep your balance. 

I CAN'T RUN 

yeah! 

with a series of awkward lunges. 

Sent that game to one of my buddies at Raven, and he managed to actually run and get to 50m... and there's a fucking hurdle. 

a game that exploits the broken-ness of current animation/simulation? bah! 

what i meant was that all this game does is present you with an incredibly shitty control scheme for something that should be as intuitive as possible and then makes it a contest. Teh win. 

theres only so many times you accidentally fall over backwards and land on your head before you laugh. 

In an Elvis shuffle. 

while you're correct in your assessment, I don't think that makes it a bad game.

A good control scheme, using your criteria, abstracts the details of an activity and emphasizes the top-level goals instead -- a way to limit complexity and provide focus. Therefore, a game about conquering the planet would involve moving huge armies, not micromanaging individual squads or soldiers. A game where you are an individual soldier focuses on shooting, reloading, moving around, but you don't have to worry about low-level activities like moving your limbs.

This game is about the low-level muscle coordination. Unless you think there is a different keyboard mapping that make more sense, I'm not sure what you suggest -- the game is about moving your legs to run, abstracting that would remove the game. An "intuitive" control scheme is simply one you're already familiar with. Show Quake to your grandmother and see how intuitive she thinks it is. 

Following your argumentation, that would just make it a bad game mechanic :)

But imho "there's no better way" doesn't help with the shittyness of the controls. It's still shitty controls ;) They just don't work. Btw, there is a better way, it's called animation. It's just not realtime.

imagine that 'game' with the goal of "walk as beautifully as you can". What part of it would be fun? Or rewarding?

bah, i just can't write or think anymore today. 

just a beta, but absolutely awesome. EA hired the guy who made fancy pants adventures apparently, and the animation and movement is ace:

http://www.bornegames.com/?page_id=369 

~3 days and counting.

It's an instant classic. One of those games where it gets more interesting, not less, as you play.

With bots is ok, but it's with bots.

Replaying the demo so far we've had three last-man-standing finishes. Basically the group turning on each over before closing the door to the safe room.

One involved a 'mate' chucking a molotiv into the safe room where the rest of us were waiting. I saw what he was doing (waiting to close the door) and exited. He was stood next to a gascan and I had an automatic shotgun.

Playing on a LAN, and we're pissing off all the Quake4 players by screaming at each other more than they do.

Just waiting for the full game now.

This game gets an ijed nine drinks drank. 

Yeah, its pure gaming gold as far as im concerned. 

Should I buy this game and play with you gaylords?? 

Yes you should.
Gonna be hard not to want to shoot you despite it being coop though. 

Gonna be hard not to want to shoot you despite it being coop though

I rofl'ed

But yes you should get it Shamb, if only to shoot Bal in an act of revenge. 

But I'm playing solo the first time through, with the AI. As far as I'm aware the AI is better with weapons and teamplay, I can't count how many times I've been saved by them.

They always put me first before themselves, as in healing me even if they need it a bit more.

They never rush me, so I can take my time and look around levels and go at my own pace as opposed to human players flying through a map with me trying to play catch up with them.

And lastly, I know they won't do anything stupid on purpose like throw a Molotov next to me or curse at me because I should have closed that particular door earlier when the zombie mob was coming. 

On expert mode they aren't smart enough really, much better off playing with humans then, AI get owned pretty fast.
And the stupid things humans do just add to the game really, accidentally shooting a team mate point blank with a shotgun makes for some interesting situations. =) 

I got the demo running even on this poorly machine, so I can certify if you meet orange box specs, then you can run L4D.

The coop bots seem mostly competent, they don't ever have pathing problems or split up(that I've seen). Even on expert they seem to be capable of meeting the combat so long as you work hard.

Until the tank comes on the scene. Since you need to lead the bots around the map, you're almost always on point when he appears. He always seems to target me first, smash me to the ground before there's the remotest chance of dealing fatal damage. Left to their own devices, the bots are then thoroughly incapable of beating it, and so you get a game over with everyone pinned.

The only way I've found of beating it is to ruthlessly push one of the other bots into it's path, let it take out them while I keep popping headshots, and hope that afterwards they respawn quickly. Anyone got tips? 

And the stupid things humans do just add to the game really, accidentally shooting a team mate point blank with a shotgun makes for some interesting situations. =)


Oh yeah, it will do. Where's my mofoing credit card? 

you live in a van down by the river